netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+FuTScyBjKp00G-EQA2j0WCn5e8S0QakMUeTPKF5TPi7YjQ3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:23:24 -0400
From:	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
To:	Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr>
Cc:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr> wrote:
>
>
> On 04/21/2013 06:42 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>
>> Tx has the advantage that time sources can be chosen
>> per socket independent of all other sockets
>
>
> Sorry if my question is trivial.
> I understand that when we require rx timestamping, we need to ask to the
> device to timestamp all incoming packets since we don't know the path of the
> packet in advance.
> For tx timestamping, you seems to say that the request to timestamp the
> packet is contained in the skbuff and is done on a per packet basis ?

Yes. More precisely, this is set using a socket option and applies to
all packets on that socket sent since the last update of the socket
option.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html